The limits of gadgetry in teaching kids. A D97 candidate makes points.

Being critical of some “learning initiatives,” technologies which he finds

expensive, disruptive to classroom learning and, in the case of the iPads, unproven with respect to their pedagogical justification.

The limits of gadgetry. He argues

that the technological measures Supt. Al Roberts pushed are exemplary [ouch! means marvelous, wonderful, just what we are looking for; try “examples”] of a series of administrative decisions that have taken away from classroom-based, teacher-centered learning. The measures, he said, have frustrated a lot of the district’s teachers.

I believe him.

“I’m not against technology; it’s been enormously helpful,” he said. “But with Fast ForWord and the iPads, it’s been technology for its own sake that’s been driving the process.

The current board should’ve done its job and exercised due diligence and oversight,” he added, noting that the board was so enamored of [good call! did not say “enamored with”] Roberts’s managerial competence, they overlooked what he may [have] lacked in the area of education.

I get his point, particularly in its recognition of the importance of the managerial.

“Do we simply want a competent manager or do we want someone with solid educational credentials and experience and who remains passionate about education?” Abbott asks.

He wants both, of course, making his pitch reasonably enough for teacher-student interaction.